@inproceedings{Sjoberg:2007:FEM:1253532.1254730,
 author = {Sjoberg, Dag I.  K. and Dyba, Tore and Jorgensen, Magne},
 title = {The Future of Empirical Methods in Software Engineering Research},
 booktitle = {2007 Future of Software Engineering},
 series = {FOSE '07},
 year = {2007},
 isbn = {0-7695-2829-5},
 pages = {358--378},
 numpages = {21},
 url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/FOSE.2007.30},
 doi = {10.1109/FOSE.2007.30},
 acmid = {1254730},
 publisher = {IEEE Computer Society},
 address = {Washington, DC, USA},
}

@book{Wohlin:2000:ESE:330775,
 author = {Wohlin, Claes and Runeson, Per and H\"{o}st, Martin and Ohlsson, Magnus C. and Regnell, Bj\"{o}orn and Wessl{\'e}n, Anders},
 title = {Experimentation in software engineering: an introduction},
 year = {2000},
 isbn = {0-7923-8682-5},
 publisher = {Kluwer Academic Publishers},
 address = {Norwell, MA, USA},
}

@book{BookESE,
    address = {{Norwell, MA, USA}},
    author = {{Juristo} and {Moreno}},
    citeulike-article-id = {8174216},
    keywords = {experimentation},
    posted-at = {2010-11-01 23:31:55},
    priority = {2},
    publisher = {{Kluwer Academic Publishers}},
    title = {{Basics of Software Engineering Experimentation}},
    year = {2001}
}

@techreport{systematic-review-guidelines-2007,
    abstract = {{The objective of this report is to propose comprehensive guidelines for systematic literature reviews appropriate for software engineering researchers, including PhD students. A systematic literature review is a means of evaluating and interpreting all available research relevant to a particular research question, topic area, or phenomenon of interest. Systematic reviews aim to present a fair evaluation of a research topic by using a trustworthy, rigorous, and auditable methodology. The guidelines presented in this report were derived from three existing guidelines used by medical researchers, two books produced by researchers with social science backgrounds and discussions with researchers from other disciplines who are involved in evidence-based practice. The guidelines have been adapted to reflect the specific problems of software engineering research. The guidelines cover three phases of a systematic literature review: planning the review, conducting the review and reporting the review. They provide a relatively high level description. They do not consider the impact of the research questions on the review procedures, nor do they specify in detail the mechanisms needed to perform meta-analysis.}},
    author = {Kitchenham, Barbara and Charters, Stuart},
    citeulike-article-id = {3955888},
    citeulike-linkout-0 = {http://www.dur.ac.uk/ebse/resources/Systematic-reviews-5-8.pdf},
    institution = {Keele University and Durham University Joint Report},
    keywords = {research-methods, systematic-review},
    number = {EBSE 2007-001},
    posted-at = {2009-01-27 02:42:01},
    priority = {2},
    title = {{Guidelines for performing Systematic Literature Reviews in Software Engineering}},
    url = {http://www.dur.ac.uk/ebse/resources/Systematic-reviews-5-8.pdf},
    year = {2007}
}

@article{Sjoberg:2005:SCE:1092717.1092851,
 author = {Sjoberg, Dag I. K. and Hannay, Jo E. and Hansen, Ove and By Kampenes, Vigdis and Karahasanovic, Amela and Liborg, Nils-Kristian and C. Rekdal, Anette},
 title = {A Survey of Controlled Experiments in Software Engineering},
 journal = {IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng.},
 issue_date = {September 2005},
 volume = {31},
 number = {9},
 month = sep,
 year = {2005},
 issn = {0098-5589},
 pages = {733--753},
 numpages = {21},
 url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TSE.2005.97},
 doi = {10.1109/TSE.2005.97},
 acmid = {1092851},
 publisher = {IEEE Press},
 address = {Piscataway, NJ, USA},
 keywords = {Index Terms- Controlled experiments, Index Terms- Controlled experiments, survey, research methodology, empirical software engineering., empirical software engineering., research methodology, survey},
}

@ARTICLE{799942,
author={Torii, K. and Matsumoto, K. and Nakakoji, K. and Takada, Y. and Takada, S. and Shima, K.},
journal={Software Engineering, IEEE Transactions on}, title={Ginger2: an environment for computer-aided empirical software engineering},
year={1999},
month={jul/aug},
volume={25},
number={4},
pages={474 -492},
keywords={CAESE environments;CAESE framework;Ginger2 environment;case studies;computer aided empirical software engineering;control integration;data integration;empirical data types;empirical software engineering lifecycle;experiment design;eye traces;integration mechanism;keystrokes;multiple data types;needs analysis;packaging results;process management mechanism;process model;skin resistance level;three dimensional movement;tool sets;videotaped data;computer aided software engineering;data structures;software architecture;},
doi={10.1109/32.799942},
ISSN={0098-5589},}

@INPROCEEDINGS{1237967,
author={Punter, T. and Ciolkowski, M. and Freimut, B. and John, I.},
booktitle={Empirical Software Engineering, 2003. ISESE 2003. Proceedings. 2003 International Symposium on}, title={Conducting on-line surveys in software engineering},
year={2003},
month={sept.-1 oct.},
volume={},
number={},
pages={ 80 - 88},
keywords={ Internet; controlled experiments; empirical strategy; engineering research; methodological support; online surveys; software development; software engineering; Internet; formal specification; formal verification; software engineering; user modelling;},
doi={10.1109/ISESE.2003.1237967},
ISSN={},}

@INPROCEEDINGS{4492892,
author={Travassos, G.H. and dos Santos, P.S.M. and Neto, P.G.M. and Biolchini, J.},
booktitle={Engineering of Complex Computer Systems, 2008. ICECCS 2008. 13th IEEE International Conference on}, title={An Environment to Support Large Scale Experimentation in Software Engineering},
year={2008},
month={31 2008-april 3},
volume={},
number={},
pages={193 -202},
keywords={knowledge acquisition;scientific knowledge management;software engineering;knowledge acquisition;knowledge management;software engineering;},
doi={10.1109/ICECCS.2008.30},
ISSN={},}

@ARTICLE{Fowler2010,
author = {Fowler, Martin},
file = {:C$\backslash$:/Users/Italo/Dropbox/Livros/Engenharia de Software/Domain Specific Languages - Martin Fowler.pdf:pdf},
isbn = {9780321712943},
pages = {0--321},
title = {{Domain-specific languages}},
url = {http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en\&btnG=Search\&q=intitle:Domain-specific+languages\#0},
year = {2010}
}

@inproceedings{quteprints42184,
       booktitle = {19th European Conference on Information Systems : ICT and Sustainable Service Development (ECIS 2011)},
          editor = {Virpi Tuunainen and Joe  Nandhakumar and Matti  Rossi and Wael Soliman},
           title = {A systematic, tool-supported method for conducting literature reviews in information systems},
          author = {Wasana Bandara and Suraya Miskon and Erwin Fielt},
         address = {Helsinki, Finland},
            year = {2011},
        keywords = {information systems, literature review, content analysis, coding, NVIVO },
             url = {http://eprints.qut.edu.au/42184/},
        abstract = {While the importance of literature studies in the IS discipline is well recognized, little attention has been paid to the underlying structure and method of conducting effective literature reviews. Despite the fact that literature is often used to refine the research context and direct the pathways for successful research outcomes, there is very little evidence of the use of resource management tools to support the literature review process. In this paper we want to contribute to advancing the way in which literature studies in Information Systems are conducted, by proposing a systematic, pre-defined and tool-supported method to extract, analyse and report literature. This paper presents how to best identify relevant IS papers to review within a feasible and justifiable scope, how to extract relevant content from identified papers, how to synthesise and analyse the findings of a literature review and what are ways to effectively write and present the results of a literature review. The paper is specifically targeted towards novice IS researchers, who would seek to conduct a systematic detailed literature review in a focused domain. Specific contributions of our method are extensive tool support, the identification of appropriate papers including primary and secondary paper sets and a pre-codification scheme. We use a literature study on shared services as an illustrative example to present the proposed approach.}
}

@book{Cook2007,
author = {Cook, Steve and Jones, G},
file = {:C$\backslash$:/Users/Italo/Dropbox/Cursos/UFPE/Mestrado/Disciplinas/Paradigmas de Linguagens/Projeto/Concep\c{c}\~{a}o/Addison.Wesley.Domain.Specific.Development.with.Visual.Studio.DSL.Tools.May.2007.pdf:pdf},
isbn = {9780321398208},
title = {{Domain-specific development with visual studio dsl tools}},
url = {http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1407396},
year = {2007}
}
